Basic buddhist concepts analysed in a Christian website

last SG · 2012-12-12T09:15:01+00:00

Re the flag and the wind, I believe the answer has got to do with the mind, but this is not the proper answer to give at all. It is again more like playing m...

An Eternal Now SG

Yes. The sense of self is constructed, it is built. That deluded sense [not reality] of "Self" is formed out of delusion, out of a mental habit of referencing with what we mistakenly view as a 'substantial self' (I, me) and 'that which belongs to self' (mine). The sense of 'self' matures as a person grows up.

As insight of anatta arises, we realize there never was a doer apart from a deed or a thinker apart from a thought or a seer apart from seeing/sight.

Then action arises not out of self-consciousness, there is no self-consciousness of an entity apart from action but instead whole being is just action. There is still free flow of will and intentionality but not pertaining to any self.

An Eternal Now SG

Even with a relationship with God also means attachment to “Self” exist.

A relationship with God, a surrendering to God, can lead to a point of transcending attachment to personality into an experienced of being lived by the higher power, however it is not yet the same as realizing anatta.

My old self has been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me. So I live in this earthly body by trusting in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. - Galatians 2:20

BroInChrist SG

What would be the difference/distinction between conventional truth and ultimate truth in Buddhism? If the self is an illusion, then any perception of it as being real would be some form of delusion, wouldn't it?

There are many articles available on the internet on this Buddhist subject. Here is one. If you do have the time, you can read up on it. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_truths_doctrine

Regarding the analogy of the man shot by an arrow, it is an interesting one. While it is more pertinent that one gets treatment for the wound, it doesn't necessarily render irrelevant who shot the arrow and where the arrow comes from, and if the arrow is poisoned, knowing such details would certainly help in getting the right antidote. And even if the wounded person eventually dies, knowing such information will further the cause of justice.

That is not the underlying message

The Christian does not say there is no good in man. But it says that being good is not good enough to be saved. One needs to be morally perfect. But since moral perfection is impossible, we cannot save ourselves. We cannot purify ourselves. We need a "cleansing agent", i.e. the blood of Christ.

Moral perfection is not an impossibility to Buddhists. Granted that most of us may never be able to do so in just one lifetime. In Buddhism, we have the 3 path of purifications to work on to arrived at it. Moral purification is just one of the paths which have to be practiced in conjunction with the other 2 path of purifications. Of course, we also do have the more detail form of the 6 Perfections which do lead to moral perfection.

Wiki says that the conventional truth may be interpreted as "obscurative truth" or "that which obscures the true nature" as a result. It is constituted by the appearances of mistaken awareness. Conventional truth would be the appearance that includes a duality of apprehender and apprehended, and objects perceived within that. Ultimate truths, are phenomena free from the duality of apprehender and apprehended.

Would you like to clarify that further? It would seem that Buddhism holds that conventional truth can be false, but ultimate truth is..well...truth i.e. what is.

In Christianity the distinction is between truth and error.

Re the point about the arrow analogy, what would be the underlying message? It would seem to me that you may have taken an either/or approach, i.e. don't ask or get treatment. I think it can be a both/and approach.

In Christianity, moral perfection means that a person has never sinned against God throughout his entire life. Which is why I mentioned that it is impossible to attain moral perfection. The Bible also says that it is appointed for man to die once and after that to face judgement, so this means that there is no second chance at life, one life is all we have got.

BroInChrist SG

No-self does not deny self. It just means the self is a convention, check this out:

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2012/06/eternalism-nihilism-and-middle-way.html

Eternalism, Nihilism and the Middle Way

Labels: Anatta, Dependent Origination, Emptiness 11 comments | |

Thanks for the article.

Correct me if I am wrong, the article seems to affirm that conventional truths are in fact delusions, i.e. false.

BroInChrist SG

No. It is not by personal works of merit that we gain liberation from samsara. Merits can only lead you as far as a rebirth in one of the higher planes including so called 'heaven' (which in Buddhist worldview are not eternal places despite their long life).

Buddhism is far from being just a teaching about morality. Morality is just a part of it.

The highest bliss of Nirvana which is achieved in the ending of all mental afflictions (craving, aversion/aggression and delusion) driving the mass of suffering or the cycle of rebirth in samsara, is achievable through the development of wisdom or insight.

This is why Buddhist practice is more about Awareness, more about discovering the true nature of mind in meditation which leads to liberation. We become aware of the luminous/bright [vivid, aware, cognizant] and empty nature of our minds. We become mindful and aware of our every experience until we penetrate their impermanent, unsatisfactory, and not-self nature. This leads to dispassion and letting go.

In addition to 'doing good, avoiding evil', the rather unique teaching of Buddhism is that it stresses also or even more on the 'purification of mind'. But this 'purification of mind' is not an endless endeavor or a kind of 'work'. Rather, purification of mind happens through the arising of wisdom, so it is awareness that naturally leads to the purification of mind and not through mental efforts or acts of suppression. Liberation in Buddhism is not by works or by grace, but by wisdom.

Not only has the Buddha achieved liberation, thousands of his students then have achieved liberation, and countless until today have also achieved liberation.

p.s. if you achieve Nirvana, it is also impossible that you will commit an immoral act, not because you uphold precepts/rules very well, but simply because the mental afflictions driving immorality: craving, aggression/ill-will, and delusion, has been ended in Wisdom-Awareness. Morality becomes secondary, albeit also important, and is actually automatically fulfilled as your path of wisdom grows.

Interesting. So in Buddhism it is neither salvation by works or grace, but by wisdom.

I take wisdom to mean proper application of knowledge leading to good results.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom

BroInChrist SG

A couple of points to clarify.

1. Re the point about never a doer apart from a deed etc. My understanding is that it is more a distinction between a noun and a verb. I don't mean to offend but why would that be regarded as some kind of insight or realisation?

2. You mentioned that there is free flow of will and intentionality but not pertaining to any self. What does that mean? Wouldn't the mention of will and intentionality presupposes a self at the least?

An Eternal Now SG

Thanks for the article.

Correct me if I am wrong, the article seems to affirm that conventional truths are in fact delusions, i.e. false.

True in the conventional sense, false in the ultimate sense.

For example we impute the label 'weather' but there is no really existing thing called 'weather' apart from everchanging clouds, rain, wind, lightning etc.

'Weather' is a mere convention, an imputation, a label - it is not a 'thing' with a 'core' or 'essence' that can be pinned down. It is empty of any substantially existing entity to be pinned down or located anywhere.

The same goes for 'self' or anything at all in the world.

An Eternal Now SG

Interesting. So in Buddhism it is neither salvation by works or grace, but by wisdom.

I take wisdom to mean proper application of knowledge leading to good results.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom

Yes but not conceptual knowledge. It is non-conceptual knowledge in a kind of meditative, intuitive, pre-conceptual Seeing of what is already the case.

Our moderator Thusness writes his realization here: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.sg/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html

An Eternal Now SG

A couple of points to clarify.

Most people feel that they are an independent separate Self distinct from their experiences, perceptions and action. They feel alienated, self-contracted, distant from the world as a result and they become attached to the sense of I, me, and mine. This is a root cause of delusion and attachment.

It can be realized that in reality, there never was a seer apart from the act of seeing/seen, a doer apart from an action, hearer apart from heard, etc.

The experience is one of at-oneness with everything but there is not even an 'I' left to 'feel' the at oneness. Instead there is just one act of perception, one action, happening as crystal clarity without any self, separation or division.

Athletes do sometimes feel this 'oneness' but only temporarily, even though intentionality is totally factored into their total exertion in action, there is no self consciousness but his entire being is exerted as that intentionality+action. After realization, that feeling can become sort of permanent. And total exertion becomes a natural path of practice.

BroInChrist SG

Then how would you assess or know whether anything that is said in any statement is true in the conventional or ultimate sense? What is the criteria for judgment that is itself not subject to the conventional/ultimate truth distinction?

BroInChrist SG

I can understand that sometimes people feel alienated or distant, but I think that's just how they are feeling. Feelings come and go and IMO are too flippant to reflect truth or reality. That said, regardless of such feelings I don't suppose people, when they do reflect during their sober moments, will separate their experiences from their very beings i.e. self.

Re the point about experiencing at-oneness with everything. I think what needs to be established is really whether we are one with everything, some kind of monism? I think that sometimes some people do claim that they are experience "the moment" in time when everything seems to be "one" but again these would be personal-to-holder experiences. It's hard to quibble with experiences, if you know what I mean.

I guess what I am trying to say is that feelings are not a good basis to judge the truth of a claim or belief.

BroInChrist SG

If something is false in the ultimate sense, then it is false, regardless of how one thinks it is true, or even if one calls it a conventional truth.

From what you described, correct me if I am wrong but it seems that Buddhism tends to have a rather reductionistic view of existence.

BroInChrist SG

Just clicked on the weblink above and what caught me was the "I AM" claim. I suppose you would know that in the Bible God called Himself "I AM" which is also known as the tetragrammaton, the name by which God revealed Himself to Moses on Mt Sinai. What you would call an experience would be what in Christianity be God Himself. Jesus even called Himself "I AM" which the religious leaders saw clearly as a claim to being God.

Singtaxi SG

If I am not wrong, the article says that the Buddha set aside the question of whether the self exists or not, i.e. refuses to answer because the answer will lead to suffering and stress. Personally I would take issue with a refusal to answer because the consequences of the answer (whether leading to stress or suffering or not) is distinct from the answer itself. One can always answer a question with a yes or a no, provided one knows the answer.

I love the answer: "You cannot question god." whenever evangelist can't provide an answer to my question.

BroInChrist SG

I love the answer: "You cannot question god." when evangelist can't provide an answer to my question.

That depends on what is your question. If I cannot answer your question my answer would be, I don't know. It won't be that you cannot question God.

But then again I would say that it is true that you cannot question ultimate authority because that's what it means to be ultimate. If you can question authority or make that ultimate authority obligated to you and subjected to you, then you are the ultimate authority who cannot be questioned, because there is nothing above ultimate.

Having said that, I am of the view you can ask questions to God, but what you can't demand from God is that He must answer you. God is God. God owes no man anything. You do not owe your creation an answer. The decision to answer is entirely your prerogative. Even if man does not have the satisfaction of an answer, God remains God. That should be the humble attitude of man, which Job finally realises as we read in the OT book of Job.

Singtaxi SG

That depends on what is your question. If I cannot answer your question my answer would be, I don't know. It won't be that you cannot question God.

I am a simple man. My questions are simple questions.

1. Why god created man? (No offence, but I am always curious as to why this actually happened)
2. Why the supposedly almighty god created an imperfect man or rather a sinner?
3. Why god need to sacrifice his only son to atone the sin of man if in the first place god created a perfect man?
4. Why can't god create a man who will obey him and he live happily ever after?

.....

BroInChrist SG

I am a simple man. My questions are simple questions.

.....

Can I request that you direct these questions to my forum at the link below?

http://sgforums.com/forums/4245

This is a Buddhist forum and out of respect to the Mods here I think it will not be appropriate to turn this into a Christian apologetics thread.

Singtaxi SG

Can I request that you direct these questions to my forum at the link below?

http://sgforums.com/forums/4245

This is a Buddhist forum and out of respect to the Mods here I think it will not be appropriate to turn this into a Christian apologetics thread.

I am just giving you an example of the questions I asked when somobody trying to preach to me.

BroInChrist SG

I am just giving you an example of the questions I asked when somobody trying to preach to me.

Oh I see. For the record I believe answers to these questions can be given. The issue is whether you wish to accept the answer. Speaking for myself, my style is to give answers based on what the Bible says, or what can be inferred from the Bible, and if the Bible does not explicitly teaches it, then my suggested answer must not contradict any part of the Bible. For example, your first question has an answer. In Colossians 1:15 it is written:

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation, for all things in heaven and on earth were created by him—all things, whether visible or invisible, whether thrones or dominions, whether principalities or powers—all things were create through him and FOR him."

So this answer really answers the question, "Why is there anything rather than nothing?" Why create, not just man, but anything at all for that matter?

I recommend this website which you can get many answers as well.

http://www.gotquestions.org/why-did-God-create-us.html

Dawnfirstlight SG

I am a simple man. My questions are simple questions.

.....

Just being busy body. Followings are the answers based on Buddha's teachings :

1) There is no creator. No one created you. There's no really "You" as there's no self and each of us is just combinations 因缘合和

2) You can become a perfect person if you practice according to Buddha's teachings. We are "perfect" right from the start as our true nature (Buddha nature) is "perfect", however due to the 3 unwholesome roots or 3 poisons, greed, attachments and aversions etc. that we become sinners. Our true nature is neither good nor bad.

3) No one can atone sins for another person. Your sins can be lighten if you repent sincerely.

4) You can never live happily if you did not cease your greed, aversions, attachments etc.

« Previous Page Next Page »